HILLARYPOCRISY IN ACTION

Remember when Hillary Clinton was aghast at the possibility that Donald Trump suggested he might the 2016 election?

Let me remind you via the first paragaph of Patrick Healy and Jonathan Martin’s coverage of their October 19th debate – a stunningly one-sided “news report” that was disgracefully partisan even by New York Times standards (more about this further on):

In a remarkable statement that seemed to cast doubt on American democracy, Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he might not accept the results of next month’s election if he felt it was rigged against him — a stand that Hillary Clinton blasted as “horrifying” at their final and caustic debate on Wednesday.

Yep horrifying all right….while Ms. Clinton was apparently winning.

But a funny thing happened on her way to the Oval Office;  Donald Trump wound up there instead.

So now we have this, excerpted from Ari Berman’s article at motherjones.com:

A year after her defeat by Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton says “there are lots of questions about its legitimacy” due to Russian interference and widespread voter suppression efforts.

In an interview with Mother Jones in downtown Manhattan, Clinton said Russian meddling in the election “was one of the major contributors to the outcome.” The Russians used “weaponized false information,” she said, in “a very successful disinformation campaign” that “wasn’t just influencing voters—it was determining the outcome.”

Funny how losing a sure-thing election changed Hillary Clinton’s view of legitimacy, wouldn’t you say?

That, folks, is Hillarypocrisy at its finest.  And, let’s remember, this is far from the first example (I’ve been writing about it for a long time – here’s one such blog from a year ago), nor is it likely to be the last.

As for the Healy/Martin coverage of that debate, let me show you the next few paragraphs:

Mr. Trump, under enormous pressure to halt Mrs. Clinton’s steady rise in opinion polls, came across as repeatedly frustrated as he tried to rally conservative voters with hard-line stands on illegal immigration and abortion rights. But he kept finding himself drawn onto perilous political territory by Mrs. Clinton and the debate’s moderator, Chris Wallace.

He sputtered when Mrs. Clinton charged that he would be “a puppet” of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia if elected. He lashed out repeatedly, saying that “she’s been proven to be a liar on so many different ways” and that “she’s guilty of a very, very serious crime” over her State Department email practices. And by the end of the debate, when Mrs. Clinton needled him over Social Security, Mr. Trump snapped and said, “Such a nasty woman.”

Mrs. Clinton was repeatedly forced to defend her long service in government, which Mr. Trump charged had yielded no real accomplishments. But she was rarely rattled, and made a determined effort to rise above Mr. Trump’s taunts while making overtures to undecided voters.

Is it just me, or do you detect a teeny weeny smidgen of partisanship there?